- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
16 Jan 16
The reason productivity increases might have little relation to the efforts, education, etc. of the person doing the work. As a chemist I turned a all-day analytical procedure procedure into a 1.5 hour procedure for a lab technician. The lab tech's productivity improved more than 5-fold, but earned no raise for him. And it shouldn't have. I got a raise that year but it wasn't commensurate with eliminating 80% of one lab technician. I did similar things several times and the benefits went mostly to the company.
I'm not complaining; that's just how it works. The correlation between contribution and salary is loose.
16 Jan 16
Originally posted by ZahlanziAs long as the government always spends more than it brings in, not taking in taxes at all is doing little more than speeding up the process.
"The government can print its own money"
you might be trolling. but you also might be this stupid. whatever the case, i don't have to waste my time with you.
16 Jan 16
Originally posted by no1marauderDo you think that is part of the reason Bernie Sanders wants to tax some rich people 90% or more? 😏
Wages and productivity have been decoupled for at least 35 years in the US. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/what-happened-to-the-wage-and-productivity-link/
Since 1979, hourly wages have lagged far behind the growth in productivity. While productivity grew 64.9 percent in the period 1979-2013, hourly pay for production and non-supervisory workers ros ...[text shortened]... /www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/12/04/wage-d04.html
I know you don't do data, but there it is.
16 Jan 16
4 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderAlthough I can agree that there are some very rich people that i would like to have to pay 90% tax, I haven't heard of any tax plan law proposed by Bernie Sanders that would be fair to all those rich people and poor people without harming business and labor at the same time.
Do you have a YouTube for that?
It is true that the government could select certain people that are rich to tax at a high rate that would probably only effect them, but I don't know of anyone that believes that would be a good way of administering taxes fairly.
Here is a guy that tries to explain it, however, he does a poor job.
17 Jan 16
Originally posted by RJHindsIf Bill Gates had a 90% tax he would have to pay 4 BILLION a year instead of the paltry 100 million he does pay, thanks to hid cadre of lawyers. He makes 5 billion a year and pays 100m. A tax rate of 2%. I guess any republican would say, GO Bill!
Although I can agree that there are some very rich people that i would like to have to pay 90% tax, I haven't heard of any tax plan law proposed by Bernie Sanders that would be fair to all those rich people and poor people without harming business and labor at the same time.
It is true that the government could select certain people that are rich to tax a ...[text shortened]... a guy that tries to explain it, however, he does a poor job.
[youtube]lZ6vv4BmLug[/youtube]
17 Jan 16
Originally posted by sonhouseBill Gates comes from a Democrat family and continues to support Democrats with money. He donated to both Barack Obama and the GNC in 2012. 😏
If Bill Gates had a 90% tax he would have to pay 4 BILLION a year instead of the paltry 100 million he does pay, thanks to hid cadre of lawyers. He makes 5 billion a year and pays 100m. A tax rate of 2%. I guess any republican would say, GO Bill!
17 Jan 16
Originally posted by normbenignIn many cases the way to obtain a higher salary could also be for a labourer to lower his productivity. For instance you could consider someone who is "promoted" from the "production" part of a company to the administrative part of a company, which is generally higher-paid but also vastly overstaffed in most organizations.
I agree that there are plenty of factors involved in wage negotiations, as well as factors favoring each side of the bargaining. If there was no value to labor in producing products and services, there would be no production. In short, people can be overpaid, or under paid relative to their productive value. It is widely presumed among liberals that pr ...[text shortened]... ase his value and so wages, is to improve his productivity, either individually or collectively.
17 Jan 16
Originally posted by KazetNagorraActually he thinks people like him should pay less taxes though he supports a "progressive" consumption tax. http://www.inquisitr.com/1540662/bill-gates-on-income-inequality-dont-tax-capital-tax-consumption/
I'm pretty sure Bill Gates wouldn't mind paying a bit more taxes.
17 Jan 16
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderSo long as the majority of the tax burden lies on the minority of the populace and not the majority they can be plundered via the mob rule of democracy indefinitely.
Actually he thinks people like him should pay less taxes though he supports a "progressive" consumption tax. http://www.inquisitr.com/1540662/bill-gates-on-income-inequality-dont-tax-capital-tax-consumption/
However, once the entire populace has to shoulder the burden of taxation revolt is just around the corner.
Unfortunately for the mob, debt is reaching such limits they at some point will have to shoulder the burden. There will be no escape.
17 Jan 16
Originally posted by no1marauderI stand corrected. I disagree with Gates because I don't think it is the state's role to decide what is charitable and what is not.
Actually he thinks people like him should pay less taxes though he supports a "progressive" consumption tax. http://www.inquisitr.com/1540662/bill-gates-on-income-inequality-dont-tax-capital-tax-consumption/
17 Jan 16
Originally posted by KazetNagorraBut there is nothing beyond the states role.
I stand corrected. I disagree with Gates because I don't think it is the state's role to decide what is charitable and what is not.
They take over more and more every day. Nothing is beyond their grasp.